John P’s review below is exceptionally fine. Peter O’Toole is, of course, one of our most subtly manly actors. MY FAVORITE YEAR, for example.
Movies I’ve seen lately.
MEN IN BLACK 3–no alien character development at all (the strength of the first one).
BLUE LIKE JAZZ–pretty clever on showing how, at Reed College today, the only folks that have to stay in the closet are believing Christians, especially believing Baptists. Clever enough on education that dogmatically denies the God option becomes vain and trivial. But overall preachy, and not about real Christianity.
THE REAL EXOTIC MARIGOLD HOTEL–you’ll wish it were better. An ensemble movie that also lacks character development and really good performances. Still, some of the old folks do end up moving you some. A great idea for a movie, and a really great idea for a hotel.
MOONRISE KINGDOM–the most remarkably made movie in a long time. It depends so much on startling and brilliantly crafted visuals and very strange choices of music that it’s above my pay grade to even attempt to review it on one viewing. Reasons you should see it: It’s based on THE TEMPEST in some ways. It’s a fantasy that criticizes what the 60s did to civilized eros–especially the damage done to children. As good as RUSHMORE. More so, gotta go.
June 11th, 2012 | 5:14 pm
Could you specify just how “Blue Like Jazz” isn’t about “real Christianity?” The reason I ask is that I recall quite a few friends in college- friends who I went to church, FCA and other Christian discipleship groups with- reading the book, but never bothered to read it myself. I assume it’s because Miller was writing “non-religous thoughts on Christian spirituality,” which would seem to criticize orthodox Christianity, but perhaps he could also be read to be criticizing a particular tendency towards empty formalism in the church, and inability to talk about a need for tradition and religion in a way that those outside the church can understand. Again, not having read or having watched the movie, I don’t know. Generally, however, when these types of critiques aren’t going overboard and advocating absolutely churchless and religionless Christianity, that seems to be what they’re aiming at.
June 11th, 2012 | 8:41 pm
He empties Christianity of virtually all content and detaches it completely from the church. ‘That’s not to say that there’s nothing to the criticism of the empty formalism. But this guy spends a lot of time apologizing in the name of Jesus for everything from the Crusades to Bush’s foreign policy. The church can’t be blamed for the latter, at least.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact